Story highlights

Investigators in Ukraine have alleged Yanukovych and members of his party ran a corrupt regime

Ex-Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort has not been the focus of the probe

Washington (CNN)FBI and Justice Department prosecutors are conducting an investigation into possible US ties to alleged corruption of the former pro-Russian president of Ukraine, including the work of Paul Manafort's firm, according to multiple US law enforcement officials.

The investigation is broad and is looking into whether US companies and the financial system were used to aid alleged corruption by the party of former president Viktor Yanukovych.

Manafort, who resigned as chairman of Donald Trump's campaign Friday, has not been the focus of the probe, according to the law enforcement officials. The investigation is ongoing and prosecutors haven't ruled anything out, the officials said.

The probe is also examining the work of other firms linked to the former Ukrainian government, including that of the Podesta Group, the lobbying and public relations company run by Tony Podesta, brother of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.

Anti-corruption investigators in Ukraine have alleged Yanukovych and members of his party ran a corrupt regime. He fled to Russia following a public uprising in 2014.

The FBI, Justice Department and Manafort declined to comment. A Washington attorney who represents Manafort and Yanukovych didn't respond to a request for comment.

The Podesta group issued a statement saying it hired lawyers to examine its relationship with a not-for-profit organization linked to the ousted Ukrainian regime.

"The firm has retained Caplin & Drysdale as independent, outside legal counsel to determine if we were misled by the Centre for a Modern Ukraine or any other individuals with regard to the Centre's potential ties to foreign governments or political parties," the statement said.

It continued: "When the Centre became a client, it certified in writing that 'none of the activities of the Centre are directly or indirectly supervised, directed, controlled, financed or subsidized in whole or in part by a government of a foreign country or a foreign political party.' We relied on that certification and advice from counsel in registering and reporting under the Lobbying Disclosure Act rather than the Foreign Agents Registration Act. We will take whatever measures are necessary to address this situation based on Caplin & Drysdale's review, including possible legal action against the Centre."

WASHINGTON, U.S. – Newly discovered emails reveal that a covert lobbying operation was conducted by a firm run by Donald Trump's campaign on behalf of Ukraine’s then ruling party, in order to sway American opinion towards a pro-Russian government.

According to reports, the lobbying included attempts to secure positive press coverage of officials in leading publications like The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Associated Press, while also downplaying the need for sympathy towards the imprisoned rival of Ukraine's President Viktor Yanukovych.

The emails reveal that Paul Manafort and his deputy, Rick Gates did not reveal their work as foreign agents as required by laws, while Gates personally orchestrated the work of two prominent Washington lobbying firms involved.

Serhiy Leshchenko, a Ukrainian lawmaker, held that the campaign chairman should be questioned by Ukrainian investigators over almost $13 million he allegedly received from a secret account as payment for his lobbying work.

He said, “We state that Mr. Manafort received $12,774,869 from Nov. 20, 2007, until Oct. 5, 2012, from a shadow account of the Party of Regions, which was filled in a non-transparent, corrupt way.”

Further, Manafort’s name has been mentioned several times in so-called “black accounts” recording illegal off-the-books payments linked to Yanukovych’s political party, but Manafort said that “there is no evidence of ‘cash payments’ made to me by any official in Ukraine.”

He continued, “The simplest answer is the truth: I am a campaign professional. It is well known that I do work in the United States and have done work on overseas campaigns as well. I have never received a single 'off-the-books cash payment' as falsely 'reported' by The New York Times.”

Two Americas: Immigration

Meanwhile, Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump is airing the first ad of his election campaign, titled "Two Americas: Immigration," in Ohio, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Florida.

The ad focuses on security, especially with regards to immigration, and attempts to contrast an America under Trump’s helm with one under rival Hillary Clinton’s.

In Clinton’s America, “The system stays rigged against Americans. Syrian refugees flood in. Illegal immigrants convicted of committing crimes get to stay. Collecting Social Security benefits, skipping the line. Our border open. It's more of the same, but worse.”

The Republican Party forges on despite widening fissures, with recent polls indicating that 8 out of 10 Republicans have a favourable opinion of their party right now.

The chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) has stated that Trump’s nomination will not cause the Party to lose control of the House.

He said, “We’re not going to lose the House. We see no evidence of that. We’re not seeing down-ballot negative effect. We obviously know the competitive seats. But they’re all right side up. They’re all beating their opponents, some by pretty substantial margins. Even in district where our nominee is not doing well and Hillary [Clinton] is, we’re still winning in the House seats.”

However, he clarified that the Party will not let its guard down even on the safest of races, and added, “I would say, generally, everybody is focused on the presidential race, clearly, that’s on the top of mind everywhere you go. But, as I go around, our House members remain in good shape.”

Further, Trump took critics by surprise when he claimed seemingly heartfelt “regret” towards his use of acerbic language over the duration of his campaign.

He said during a speech in Charlotte that, “Sometimes, in the heat of debate and speaking on a multitude of issues, you don’t choose the right words or you say the wrong thing. I have done that, and I regret it, particularly where it may have caused personal pain. Too much is at stake for us to be consumed with these issues.”

Although social media users were gobsmacked, Clinton’s campaign took to defusing the sudden burst of hope, claiming to undo the idea that the speech could mean a “new” Donald Trump.

Welcome to Louisiana: But not for a photo op

Trump has also planned to visit the flooded state of Louisiana with running mate Mike Pence on Friday, despite advice against touring the area.

Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards' office said that the duo was welcome, despite not having discussed plans to visit earlier.

A statement from the office read, “We welcome him to (Louisiana), but not for a photo op. Instead, we hope he'll consider volunteering or making a sizable donation to the LA Flood Relief Fund to help the victims of this storm.”

At least 13 people have died and 4,000 homes damaged after a deluge of more than 2 1/2 feet across the state.

At a rally on Thursday, Trump had expressed that his prayers were with the people affected in the state “that is very special to me.”

Former House speaker Newt Gingrich pointed out that President Barack Obama was yet to make a trip to the state, and said, “It is good Trump and Pence are going to Louisiana to help fellow Americans who are in pain. Sad that Obama can't leave vacation for one day.”

Pence also filled in a personal financial disclosure form that shows his salary as Indiana governor is his main source of income.

The form, required under federal law, lists $173,860 in salary for Pence and adds that Karen Pence's earnings from a towel charm business and her work as a self-employed artist each bring in less than $1,001.

Swirling in scandal

Hillary Clinton’s email scandal remains a hot topic, with the latest revelation being that former Secretary of State Colin Powell allegedly recommended on two occasions that Clinton use a private email account for unclassified communication.

Clinton’s testimony to the FBI stated that Powell made the suggestions at a small dinner party shortly after Clinton took over at the State Department in 2009, and once again within an email exchange around the same time.

Powell's office, however, said, “General Powell has no recollection of the dinner conversation. He did write former Secretary Clinton an email memo describing his use of his personal AOL email account for unclassified messages and how it vastly improved communications within the State Department. At the time there was no equivalent system within the Department. He used a secure State computer on his desk to manage classified information.”

The Clinton Foundation announced that if the former Secretary of State is elected president, it would no longer accept donations from corporations or foreign entities.

The decision was revealed amid rising criticism against how the foundation operated during her tenure as secretary of state and potentially allowed donors to seek special access through her government post.

Donald Trump and his campaign claimed that the decision was made too late, and new campaign manager Kellyanne Conway added, “Follow the money with these people. They’re low-class grifters and gifters at every turn, whether it’s the money they make giving speeches, whether it’s the pay-for-play at the State Department.”

The investigation is instead broadly examining whether U.S. corporations and financial institutions had been used to aid former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, who was driven out of office, CNN reports.

Manafort worked for Yanukovych’s Party of Regions, though much of his activities are not publicly known. He has said the work did not trigger disclosure under the U.S. foreign lobbying law, the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

The Podesta Group and Mercury, two Washington lobbying and PR firms, worked for a client introduced to them by Manafort — the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine, a non-profit that had ties to Yanukovych’s political party.

The former client — who paid the the two firms $2.2 million from 2012 to 2014 — assured them that it had no backing from foreign governments or parties.

The CNN report says that other firms that had been involved with Manafort have also been caught up in the Justice Department investigation, including the Podesta Group. However, the report does not list Mercury as being part of the probe.

The Podesta Group on Friday announced that it had hired a law firm to look into whether the former client misled it about its sources of funding.

“The firm has retained Caplin & Drysdale as independent, outside legal counsel to determine if we were misled by the Centre for a Modern Ukraine or any other individuals with regard to the Centre’s potential ties to foreign governments or political parties,” said Podesta Group CEO Kimberley Fritts in a statement.

Podesta's advocacy activities were disclosed under the domestic lobbying statute, the Lobbying Disclosure Act, but not FARA. Both Mercury and the Podesta Group did so because of a signed statement from the client and an outside legal opinion.

“When the Centre became a client, it certified in writing that ‘none of the activities of the Centre are directly or indirectly supervised, directed, controlled, financed or subsidized in whole or in part by a government of a foreign country or a foreign political party.’ ”

“We relied on that certification and advice from counsel in registering and reporting under the Lobbying Disclosure Act rather than the Foreign Agents Registration Act. We will take whatever measures are necessary to address this situation based on Caplin & Drysdale’s review, including possible legal action against the Centre.”

Mercury has retained Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom to “to look into the matter,” said Kenneth Gross, the leader of Skadden’s political law practice, on Friday.

The two firms made the statements about outside hires prior to the CNN reporton Friday evening.

Yanukovych was ousted after a public uprising in Ukraine in 2014 and fled to Russia.

A prominent Washington lobbying firm has hired investigators to determine whether it was improperly working with pro-Russian Ukrainian politicians who also employed Paul Manafort, the former chairman of Republican Donald Trump's presidential campaign.

The Podesta Group said Friday that it had hired a law firm to examine its relationship with a not-for-profit European organization that also hired Manafort and was linked to the ousted Ukrainian regime. It said lawyers would look into whether it had been "misled" by the group, called the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine.

“We will take whatever measures are necessary to address this situation," the Podesta Group said, including possible legal action against the group.

The Podesta Group said the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine pledged in writing that none of its activities were controlled or financed by a foreign government or political party. The Podesta Group lobbied lawmakers in Washington for positions favored by the pro-Russian group.

Manafort has been the subject of extensive news coverage over his work for former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich that allegedly involved overseeing millions of dollars in secret payments. Manafort denied that he received any off-the-books cash payments.

CNN reported Friday that FBI and Justice Department prosecutors were investigating whether U.S. companies were used to aid alleged corruption by the party of Yanukovich.

Law enforcement officials told CNN the investigation included the work of Manafort's firm, although they said he was not the focus of the probe. The officials said the investigation was also examining the work of the Podesta Group.

The Podesta Group is run by Tony Podesta, brother of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.

Michael J. Morell, former acting director and deputy director of the CIA

Starting next week, Hillary Clinton and Donald J. Trump, the two major-party candidates for the presidency of the United States, will begin receiving national security briefings from intelligence officials.

One senior intelligence official, speaking to the Washington Post on August 3 on the condition of anonymity, contended “he would decline to participate in any session with Trump…citing not only concern with Trump’s expressions of admiration for Russian President Vladi­mir Putin but seeming uninterest in acquiring a deeper or more nuanced understanding of world events.”

The unnamed official’s defiance came during a week in which Trump expressed acceptance of Russia’s annexation of Crimea and was reported to have repeatedly asked a foreign policy adviser why the U.S. couldn’t just use nuclear weapons at will—and a week following his quip to reporters that he hoped Russia would hack into Clinton’s personal email server to unveil the 30,000 emails she said were deleted because they were personal in nature and not part of her conduct of government business during her tenure as secretary of state.

And those were just Trump’s latest unconventional utterances on matters of national security. He has, during the course of the presidential campaign, called for practices that defy international law, including (but not limited to) the execution of family members of ISIS fighters, waterboarding andother forms of torture, and the bombing of areas held by ISIS despite the fact these locations are largely populated by civilians (7:54). And despite his nuke-happy stance, at a Republican primary debate in December. Trump displayed ignorance of the military’s “nuclear triad” setup, which refers to the three delivery systems by which nukes can be launched: intercontinental missile, bomber aircraft or submarine.

Then there’s his backtracking on how he’d defeat ISIS. In March, Trump called for a commitment of between 20,000-30,000 U.S. troops to take on the terrorist insurgency; in an interview with theWashington Post editorial board two weeks later, he denied having done so.

As Trump’s foreign policy faux pas continue to pile up, former officials and military leaders are stepping into the light to express their concerns about the temperament and actions of candidate Trump, whom they contend to be unfit for the role of commander-in-chief. Here, we examine some recent statements by those who dare to be named.

Morell is alarmed by Trump’s rhetoric—not just what it portends for the fate of America in the world should his bid for the presidency succeed, but also for the damage it is doing right now.

“The dangers that flow from Mr. Trump’s character are not just risks that would emerge if he became president,” Morell wrote in an essay on Friday’s New York Times op-ed page. “[They are] already damaging our national security.”

Morell asserts that Trump has already been played by Russian dictator Vladimir Putin, himself a product of the former Soviet Union’s infamous spy agency, the KGB. In fact, he says, "In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation."Morell explains:

President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia was a career intelligence officer, trained to identify vulnerabilities in an individual and to exploit them. That is exactly what he did early in the primaries. Mr. Putin played upon Mr. Trump’s vulnerabilities by complimenting him. [Trump] responded just as Mr. Putin had calculated.

It’s not just Trump’s backtracking on whether it’s OK for Russia to annex Crimea (Trump was against it before he was for it, as he is now), or his invitation to Russia to hack into the email server his Democratic opponent used when she was secretary of state, or a report that the GOP standard-bearer is eager to push the nuclear button that has Morell worried; it’s the very list of traits that form Trump’s personality. Morell writes:

These traits include his obvious need for self-aggrandizement, his overreaction to perceived slights, his tendency to make decisions based on intuition, his refusal to change his views based on new information, his routine carelessness with the facts, his unwillingness to listen to others and his lack of respect for the rule of law.

Having worked for presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, Morell knows the pressures commanders-in-chief face. He says he is neither Republican nor Democrat, and has voted for politicians of both parties. This time around, he writes, there’s no doubt he will vote for the Democrats’ presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, citing her attention to detail and the views of others; he also says she leaves consideration of domestic politics outside the Situation Room door. (When others hesitated to launch the raid on the bin Laden compound on the eve of the annual White House Correspondents dinner, he writes that Clinton said, “Screw the White House Correspondents dinner.”)

Morell’s op-ed, with its character insights into world leaders, is the most powerful expression yet of the unease and alarm being felt by many in the national security establishment by Trump’s antics and obvious lack of foreign policy knowledge. With its publication, Morell joins a growing list of intelligence figures and former military leaders who are uncharacteristically speaking of what they see as the dangers to the nation posed by a potential Trump presidency.

2. Michael Hayden, former CIA and NSA director, former U.S. Air Force general.

In a July 27 interview with Eli Lake of Bloomberg News, Hayden took aim at Trump’s invitation to Russia to hack Clinton’s email server, saying:

If [Trump] is talking about the State Department e-mails on her server, he is inviting a foreign intelligence service to steal sensitive American government information," Hayden said. "If he is talking about the allegedly private e-mails that she destroyed, he is inviting a foreign intelligence service to violate the privacy of an individual protected by the Fourth Amendment to the American Constitution.

3. John Allen, retired U.S. Marine general, veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

Days after he spoke on behalf of Hillary Clinton at the Democratic National Convention, Allen sat down with George Stephanopoulos for an interview on the ABC News program, “This Week.”Acknowledging concerns expressed by some over the involvement of a former general in partisan politics, Allen said he was moved to make his DNC speech because of Trump's comments advocating torture and the killing of the families of terrorists. "That was the reason I came off the bench,” he told Stephanopoulos. “I don't intend to stay out there to be politically active."

Should Trump win the presidency, Allen said, the Republican candidate’s call for the violation of international law by members of the military “put us on a potential track for a civil-military crisis the like of which we have never seen in this country.” He continued:

You know, from the moment that those of us who are commissioned—and of course all of our enlisted troops as well—assume the mantle of our responsibility in uniform, when we swear an oath to support and defend the Constitution, which is a document and a set of principles and it supports the rule of law, one of those is to ensure that we do not obey illegal orders.

It's an inherent responsibility in who we are. And so what we need to do is ensure that we don't create an environment that puts us on a track conceivably where the United States military finds itself in a civil military crisis with a commander in chief who would have us do illegal things.

4. John Hutson, retired U.S. Navy rear admiral, the Navy’s former top lawyer.

Hutson also addressed the Democratic National Convention, citing many of the same concerns as Allen. Here’s an excerpt from his speech:

Donald Trump calls himself the law-and-order candidate—but he will violate international law. In his words, he endorses torture—at a minimum. He’ll order our troops to commit war crimes, like killing civilians. And he actually said, you have to take out [terrorists’] families. And what did he say when he was told that was illegal? He said, ‘Our troops won’t refuse. Believe me.’ This morning, this very morning, he personally invited Russia to hack us. That’s not law and order; that’s criminal intent.

Noonan, described by Mother Jones’ Becca Andrews as “a devout #NeverTrumper,” issued a tweet storm upon learning of a report by MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough alleging that Trump repeatedly asked an unnamed foreign policy adviser why the United States couldn’t issue a first launch of nuclear weapons.

Here, we piece together a few of Noonan’s tweets (read the whole tweet storm):

I don’t know if Scarborough is telling whole truth here. Anonymous sources suck. BUT... if he is... buckle the hell up. Because Trump would be undoing six decades of proven deterrence theory. The purpose of nukes is that they are never used. Trump disagrees? This would be the single greatest strategic shift in U.S. national security in decades. In a Trump presidency, our foreign policy would be this. "Leave our alliances, fall back on a nuclear first use policy." Does he understand just how F'ing dangerous that is? But what really concerns me, as a former nuke guy, is the idea of a narcissist walking around with nuclear authenticators…[I]magine having to turn launch keys not knowing if we were under attack or if it was b/c foreign leader said a mean thing on Twitter.

Noonan also asserts that Trump “doesn’t have a clue about” the nuclear triad. In the December debate in which Trump seemed to prove that point, he punted with the following comment:

The biggest problem we have today is nuclear—nuclear proliferation, and having some maniac, having some madman, go out and get a nuclear weapon. In my opinion, that is the biggest single problem that our country faces.

The nuclear chain of command is not built for debate, former CIA Director Michael Hayden said Wednesday, warning of the consequences of a Donald Trump presidency should the Republican nominee get elected and decide to push the button.

Echoing concerns from retired four-star Marine Gen. John Allen, who on Sunday predicted a "military civil crisis" if Trump is elected, Allen told MSNBC's "Morning Joe" that he feared that "we may be setting up the circumstances that create a crisis in civil-military relationships." Hayden quickly added that he did not mean "nuclear annihilation but steps far below pressing the nuclear trigger."

Story Continued Below

"What happens within the armed forces when, we fear, perhaps these kind of decisions for a military that does defer to civilian leadership. What then happens?" asked Hayden, who also led the National Security Agency. "It may actually strain and test the fabric of our civilian military control."

Despite his strong concerns about Trump, unlike Allen, who endorsed Clinton, Hayden said he was not yet prepared to say he would vote for the former secretary of state.

Asked what concerns him most about Trump, Hayden responded: "How erratic he is."

"I can argue about this position or that position. I do that with the current president," Hayden explained. "But he's inconsistent. And when you're the head of a global superpower, inconsistency, unpredictability, those are dangerous things. They frighten your friends and they tempt your enemies. And so I would be very, very concerned."

Panelist Harold Ford then asked Hayden whether any of his peers whom he respects greatly is advising Trump, and he responded, "No one."

Co-host Joe Scarborough pressed on the timeframe between when Trump would hypothetically decide to launch a nuclear weapon and when they are launched. Hayden remarked that it would depend on the situation, but added, "the system is designed for speed and decisiveness. It's not designed to debate the decision."

On the campaign trail, Donald J. Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, has sold himself as a businessman who has made billions of dollars and is beholden to no one.

But an investigation by The New York Times into the financial maze of Mr. Trump’s real estate holdings in the United States reveals that companies he owns have at least $650 million in debt — twice the amount than can be gleaned from public filings he has made as part of his bid for the White House. The Times’s inquiry also found that Mr. Trump’s fortunes depend deeply on a wide array of financial backers, including one he has cited in attacks during his campaign.

For example, an office building on Avenue of the Americas in Manhattan, of which Mr. Trump is part owner, carries a $950 million loan. Among the lenders: the Bank of China, one of the largest banks in a country that Mr. Trump has railed against as an economic foe of the United States, and Goldman Sachs, a financial institution he has said controls Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee, after it paid her $675,000 in speaking fees.

Real estate projects often involve complex ownership and mortgage structures. And given Mr. Trump’s long real estate career in the United States and abroad, as well as his claim that his personal wealth exceeds $10 billion, it is safe to say that no previous major party presidential nominee has had finances nearly as complicated.

As president, Mr. Trump would have substantial sway over monetary and tax policy, as well as the power to make appointments that would directly affect his own financial empire. He would also wield influence over legislative issues that could have a significant impact on his net worth, and would have official dealings with countries in which he has business interests.

Yet The Times’s examination underscored how much of Mr. Trump’s business remains shrouded in mystery. He has declined to disclose his tax returns or allow an independent valuation of his assets.

Earlier in the campaign, Mr. Trump submitted a 104-page federal financial disclosure form. It said his businesses owed at least $315 million to a relatively small group of lenders and listed ties to more than 500 limited liability companies. Though he answered the questions, the form appears to have been designed for candidates with simpler finances than his, and did not require disclosure of portions of his business activities.

Beyond finding that companies owned by Mr. Trump had debts of at least $650 million, The Times discovered that a substantial portion of his wealth is tied up in three passive partnerships that owe an additional $2 billion to a string of lenders, including those that hold the loan on the Avenue of the Americas building. If those loans were to go into default, Mr. Trump might not be held personally liable, but the value of his investments would sink.

Mr. Trump has said that if he were elected president, his children would be likely to run his company. Many presidents, to avoid any appearance of a conflict, have placed their holdings in blind trusts, which typically involves selling the original asset, and replacing it with different assets unknown to the seller.

Mr. Trump’s children seem unlikely to pursue that option.

Richard W. Painter, a professor of law at the University of Minnesota and, from 2005 to 2007, the chief White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush, compared Mr. Trump to Henry M. Paulson Jr., a former chief executive of Goldman Sachs whom Mr. Bush appointed as Treasury secretary.

Professor Painter advised Mr. Paulson on his decision to sell his Goldman Sachs shares, saying it was clear that Mr. Paulson could not simply have placed that stock in trust and pretended it did not exist.

If Mr. Trump were to use a blind trust, the professor said, it would be “like putting a gold watch in a box and pretending you don’t know it is in there.”

‘We Overdisclosed’

“I am the king of debt,” Mr. Trump once said on CNN. “I love debt.” But in his career, debt has sometimes gotten the better of him, leading to at least four business bankruptcies.

He is, however, quick to stress that these days his companies have very little debt.

Mr. Trump indicated in the financial disclosure form he filed in connection with this campaign that he was worth at least $1.5 billion, and has said publicly that the figure is actually greater than $10 billion. Recent estimates by Forbes and Fortune magazines and Bloomberg have put his worth at less than $5 billion.

The Republican presidential nominee has an interest in more than 30 U.S. properties, roughly half of which have debt on them.

OPEN Graphic

To gain a better understanding of Mr. Trump’s holdings and debt, The Times engaged RedVision Systems, a national property information firm, to search publicly available data on more than 30 properties in the United States. The Times identified these assets through Federal Election Commission filings, information provided by the Trump Organization and records, such as filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The search covered thousands of pages of public information, including loan documents, land leases and property deeds. It concentrated on Mr. Trump’s commercial holdings, including office towers, golf courses, a vineyard in Virginia and even an industrial building in South Carolina that he ended up with after a troubled business venture involving Donald Trump Jr. The inquiry also examined some of Mr. Trump’s residential properties, including his penthouse apartment on Fifth Avenue and a house he owns in Beverly Hills, Calif. The examination did not include Mr. Trump’s dealings outside the United States.

That Mr. Trump seems to have so much less debt on his disclosure form than what The Times found is not his fault, but rather a function of what the form asks candidates to list and how.

The form, released by the Federal Election Commission, asks that candidates list assets and debts not in precise numbers, but in ranges that top out at $50 million — appropriate for most candidates, but not for Mr. Trump. Through its examination, The Times was able to discern the amount of debt taken out on each property, and its ownership structure.

The United States Department of Defense has released details of an agreement with a private intelligence contractor, which experts believe involves the provision of services to American Special Forces working clandestinely inside Syria.

»Intersection of Politics and Military20/08/16 07:57 from Mike Nova's Shared Newslinksmikenova shared this story from Defense News - Home. Retired Army Lt. Gen. Guy Swan, vice president of education for the Association of the United States Army, discusses with Army Times’ managing editor the intersection of politics and m...

»Russia's Solitary Man16/08/16 11:00 from Mike Nova's Shared Newslinksmikenova shared this story from Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty. Vladimir Putin is building a personal army and members of his once powerful inner circle are dropping like flies. And they're not just being sacked, they're being humilia...

»How to Start a Russian Purge14/08/16 13:20 from Mike Nova's Shared Newslinksmikenova shared this story from Comments on: How to Start a Russian Purge. The jihadi group Jabhat al-Nusra announced on July 28 that it had severed all ties to al Qaeda and established a new movement in Syria: Jabhat Fateh al-Sham , or ...

Reviews

Reviews

The statistical effects of the October 28 Letter | Federal Bureau of Investigation - NYT

"Many good questions could and should al-zo be asked when Mr. Comey testifies in the closed session of the House Intelligence Committee next week... Comey's overall "motivations" might be complex and and at the same time simple: the security of the country. The details of these complexities are not easy to read..." - by Michael Novakhov - 4.25.17

Gangs, Intelligence Services, and Politics

M.N.: It would be unforgivably naive to suppose that the U.S. criminal Underworld is not controlled these days by the Russian Mafia, and, in turn, by the Russian Intelligence Services. It would also be unforgivably naive to suppose that there are no messages contained in the various criminal acts, and that there are no connections between the Underworld's recent operations and the present situation in the U.S., including the present investigations. As a matter of facts and the investigative leads, they might hold and provide the most easily accessible clues. Attention, the FBI and the significant others: do access these clues.

Smoke and Fire: The Trumputkins, the Trumpumpkins, "The Tillerson Ultimatum", and bad, bad Assad

By Michael Novakhov: So, the Trump - Putin mysterious marriage is on the rocks... The unresolved issues, whatever, whoever, and however triggers the attention to them and their discussions, have to be resolved: soundly, timely, fundamentally, and the long-term; otherwise they come back and accumulate, and together with the other unresolved issues, snowball and cause the avalanches. Nobody needs this mess, enough snow jobs everywhere... That's what Mishustin thinks...

"If you really want to fight ISIS, look into its origins and essence first." - Fight Against "ISIS"

In the opinion of the great many observers, those "sham" groups are nothing more than the creations and proxies of the Russian Military Intelligence (GRU), formed on the basis of the coalitions of the disaffected ex- Baathist Saddam's military (and first of all, military intelligence officers, historically tied with the GRU), with the "rebels-for-hire", and the Assad's Syrian Intelligence Services, which are also the proxies of the GRU.

"Trumpism" as the "social-political experiment" and the "Gang of Four"

The engineered election of Donald Trump as the U.S. President is the joint operation of the German, Russian, and Israeli Intelligence Services with the major executive and operational role played by the Russian-Jewish Mafia at the head of the International Organized Crime - by Michael Novakhov

Tillerson's Complaint:

"Lavrov won't dance with me..."

Lavrov's Response:

"My mama done tol' me... A man's a two-face..."

Vovchick "The Tarantula", why were you so "loud"?!

For Russia (or any other state), this extraordinary, unusual, demonstrative, primitive, blatant "loudness" was like digging her own grave with regard to the US - Russian relations, especially at the time when their improvement and the relief of sanctions is so desired by them, and no doubts, they would understand this very well. This peculiarity in this affair points to the possible deliberate set-up from the third party... The US - Russia - Germany triangle and the role of the revived German intelligence in it after the WW2 have to be examined under the most powerful microscope, in all their hidden details, and in the historical perspective.

Mike Nova's Shared NewsLinks Review

Mike Nova's Shared Newslinks

Mike Nova's Shared Newslinks

Howl!

The America of my dreams: Shattered. Raped.

The King Trump - by Michael Novakhov

The public prayers for His Majesty's health, wealth, and well-being, and also for the development of his additional intellectual capacities should be held no less than three times a day in all public squares, government offices, courthouses, and the places of worship, and also in all the private and public toilets, with the benefit of generating the taxable and multiple extra-flushes. Hopefully, it will flush out in due time.

The Information Age

All the relevant information at your fingertips: Information is not a commodity for sale but one of the most vital and important inalienable rights. To paraphrase Descartes: "I have access to information therefore I am". ("Information Age" - post of 11.30-21.13 | Image from: Information - Google Images)